Problem neighbour

[JP1]

Risky but I know of cattle dealers who have some spare ones or would move them on to someone with a spare or two.
Would take a bit of nerve but the 'owner' would have a hard job to prove anything if he has no records , herd book etc.

And then you hand the argument straight to the badgerists . Terrific

I find it quite hard to accept there's a small minority who play Russian roulette with their cattle bio-security

 

[wasted years]

And then you hand the argument straight to the badgerists . Terrific

I find it quite hard to accept there's a small minority who play Russian roulette with their cattle bio-security

You are going off on your own path here with respect, I am suggesting a possible but illegal method of combating a problem as raised by the OP.
How much bio-security do you think is involved with persistent straying cattle?
As I have just said, this is a tongue in cheek response to a tongue in cheek OP .

 

[Ukjay]

I find it quite hard to accept there's a small minority who play Russian roulette with their cattle bio-security

And the point you have just made - is why I say it is beggars belief why if a situation is known, as the case is here of a perpetual offender and alledged poor helth animals getting onto ones land, why one would not look to protect their own area better, but hey - its the other persons responsibility for fencing animals in, isn't it!

 

[Dry Rot]

According to my local Trading Standards, straying is not a movement. (Well, that's what they said!). A movement is the deliberate moving of cattle from one place to another. But I don't have it in writing so no doubt they'd change their minds to whatever suited them best if it ever got to court.

 

[betweenthelines]

"Appear to" be on the OP's land "for about a week" How can you charge when you don't know how long they've been there?

Best way to deal with this is to turn them back out on the road as soon as they come onto your land.

Of course, if they somehow find their way into the nearest town, the owner would have to deal with them.

 

[johnspeehs]

@Ukjay . Why are you so hell bent on making the OP somehow responsible for keeping someone else’s cattle out? . If cattlemans stock were breaking the other way that’s a different story but doesn’t seem to be the case. If you keep stock it’s your responsibility to keep them in end of. I have the same problem here with a neighbour who is exactly the same, doesn’t care where his stock are . I have put up hundreds of metres of fencing to keep him out but they just find another place further along to get through, usually because he has feck all grass for them to eat, he would never think of fetching them back so I end up having to shut them in only for him to collect them and drop them back in the same field again.
Nothing as frustrating as spending hundreds of pounds buying fencing stuff and putting it up through pishing rain and cold while he looks out through his living rooom window at me. Most neighbours will go 50/50 on a march fence but this guy wouldn’t buy a staple, why should I have to fork out so he can get the Benefit? He has a hell of s lot more money than me.

 

[hendrebc]

@Ukjay . Why are you so hell bent on making the OP somehow responsible for keeping someone else’s cattle out? . If cattlemans stock were breaking the other way that’s a different story but doesn’t seem to be the case. If you keep stock it’s your responsibility to keep them in end of. I have the same problem here with a neighbour who is exactly the same, doesn’t care where his stock are . I have put up hundreds of metres of fencing to keep him out but they just find another place further along to get through, usually because he has feck all grass for them to eat, he would never think of fetching them back so I end up having to shut them in only for him to collect them and drop them back in the same field again.
Nothing as frustrating as spending hundreds of pounds buying fencing stuff and putting it up through pishing rain and cold while he looks out through his living rooom window at me. Most neighbours will go 50/50 on a march fence but this guy wouldn’t buy a staple, why should I have to fork out so he can get the Benefit? He has a hell of s lot more money than me.

I feel your pain

 

[johnspeehs]

I feel your pain

Yea and the most frustrating thing is when you have chewed the balls off him for the umpteenth time and then meet him in the shop the next morning and he chats away like nothing has happened

 

[som farmer]

Ddvtxz

Jesus .......do you fancy prison food?
Can think of better places for a holiday!

you would propably get a longer sentence than if you had burgled a places!

 

[hendrebc]

Yea and the most frustrating thing is when you have chewed the balls off him for the umpteenth time and then meet him in the shop the next morning and he chats away like nothing has happened

The one I'm on about avoids me like a bad smell and won't answer the phone. I saw him in the market one day so I went to see him. He kept moving away with me chasing him it was like a game of bloody pacman

 

[Ukjay]

@Ukjay . Why are you so hell bent on making the OP somehow responsible for keeping someone else’s cattle out? . If cattlemans stock were breaking the other way that’s a different story but doesn’t seem to be the case. If you keep stock it’s your responsibility to keep them in end of. I have the same problem here with a neighbour who is exactly the same, doesn’t care where his stock are . I have put up hundreds of metres of fencing to keep him out but they just find another place further along to get through, usually because he has feck all grass for them to eat, he would never think of fetching them back so I end up having to shut them in only for him to collect them and drop them back in the same field again.
Nothing as frustrating as spending hundreds of pounds buying fencing stuff and putting it up through pishing rain and cold while he looks out through his living rooom window at me. Most neighbours will go 50/50 on a march fence but this guy wouldn’t buy a staple, why should I have to fork out so he can get the Benefit? He has a hell of s lot more money than me.

Erm, I have not said it is his responsibility so please do not twist what was said. I even started by saying I would be checking my own fencing to see how it happened, but hey - I believe I understand why you could be keen to ignore that part of the equation, but hey - here is the opening statement again for you!!

Firstly - I would be asking myself how they got onto my land in the first instance, and then understand why my own fencing was not up to scratch as they should not have gotten onto my land in the first instance.

I have then, following additional one sided comments etc, basically questioned the logic of which in my mind is coming from seriously flawed logic in one relying on an old law, that is not able to be policed / enforced correctly - to a point that somehow makes someone who is hell bent on ignoring any legal requirement to fence their stock in, do so

Furthermore, I then went onto say that as this is a perpetual issue as commented / stated by the OP, it was beggars belief why anyone would not look to protect their own stock / property better as this kind of thing only causes a lot more trouble for both parties.

My comments were also born out through the normal logic we see in modern society, whereby we get into the 'Why should I' stance - thus I questioned this following the noted comments about the stock being on his land 7 times / 2 times etc, why one would not look to protect their own stock / property better, but I know damn well why this is not the chosen route, but that is another subjective discussion altogether, so I will not go there for obvious reasons!

Anyhow, leave your fences open, leave your livlihood protection to a legislative system that is about as much use chocolate fireguards apparently - but don't then moan about issues that arrise when - looking full circle, you can quite easily prevent them yourself.

 

[texel-tom]

Erm, I have not said it is his responsibility so please do not twist what was said. I even started by saying I would be checking my own fencing to see how it happened, but hey - I believe I understand why you could be keen to ignore that part of the equation, but hey - here is the opening statement again for you!

I have then, following additional one sided comments etc, basically questioned the logic of which in my mind is coming from seriously flawed logic in one relying on an old law, that is not able to be policed / enforced correctly - to a point that somehow makes someone who is hell bent on ignoring any legal requirement to fence their stock in, do so

Furthermore, I then went onto say that as this is a perpetual issue as commented / stated by the OP, it was beggars belief why anyone would not look to protect their own stock / property better as this kind of thing only causes a lot more trouble for both parties.

My comments were also born out through the normal logic we see in modern society, whereby we get into the 'Why should I' stance - thus I questioned this following the noted comments about the stock being on his land 7 times / 2 times etc, why one would not look to protect their own stock / property better, but I know damn well why this is not the chosen route, but that is another subjective discussion altogether, so I will not go there for obvious reasons!

Anyhow, leave your fences open, leave your livlihood protection to a legislative system that is about as much use chocolate fireguards apparently - but don't then moan about issues that arrise when - looking full circle, you can quite easily prevent them yourself.

What a load of waffle dressed up as logic - if you have nothing constructive to add other than being incendiary why bother at all?

 

[Ukjay]

What a load of waffle dressed up as logic - if you have nothing constructive to add other than being incendiary why bother at all?

What a great comment - love it!!!

One could easily add something more ellaborate to the above dig - but in all honesty, by your own ill thought through process of trying to pop a dig at me - you have proven what I was suggesting is logical, therefore the other side thus is illogical....

The devil is in the detail they say, which is so often missed by skim readers

 

[texel-tom]

What a great comment - love it!!!

One could easily add something more ellaborate to the above dig - but in all honesty, by your own ill thought through process of trying to pop a dig at me - you have proven what I was suggesting is logical, therefore the other side thus is illogical....

The devil is in the detail they say, which is so often missed by skim readers

Cool, before becoming embroiled in a tedious and dull internet debate about stock fencing or the lack of it. I’ll bow down to your vastly superior logic.

 

[Jameshenry]

@Ukjay . Why are you so hell bent on making the OP somehow responsible for keeping someone else’s cattle out? . If cattlemans stock were breaking the other way that’s a different story but doesn’t seem to be the case. If you keep stock it’s your responsibility to keep them in end of. I have the same problem here with a neighbour who is exactly the same, doesn’t care where his stock are . I have put up hundreds of metres of fencing to keep him out but they just find another place further along to get through, usually because he has feck all grass for them to eat, he would never think of fetching them back so I end up having to shut them in only for him to collect them and drop them back in the same field again.
Nothing as frustrating as spending hundreds of pounds buying fencing stuff and putting it up through pishing rain and cold while he looks out through his living rooom window at me. Most neighbours will go 50/50 on a march fence but this guy wouldn’t buy a staple, why should I have to fork out so he can get the Benefit? He has a hell of s lot more money than me.

If i were you i would be making his stock dissapear ! Perhaps he would get the message then

 

[PaulNix]

I can't see any logic in fencing both sides of your own boundary to stop others cattle from straying, logic would dictate that each person fences there own and it's not reasonable to assume one person should fence another persons boundary for them, but some people see logic in different ways I guess especially when digging a hole on a internet forum.

 

[Ukjay]

If i were you i would be making his stock dissapear ! Perhaps he would get the message then

Another rediculous directive from a farmer about causing issues to another, which would be great for Public Viewing in an industry that is already suffering..

 

[exmoor dave]

Erm, I have not said it is his responsibility so please do not twist what was said. I even started by saying I would be checking my own fencing to see how it happened, but hey - I believe I understand why you could be keen to ignore that part of the equation, but hey - here is the opening statement again for you!!



I have then, following additional one sided comments etc, basically questioned the logic of which in my mind is coming from seriously flawed logic in one relying on an old law, that is not able to be policed / enforced correctly - to a point that somehow makes someone who is hell bent on ignoring any legal requirement to fence their stock in, do so

Furthermore, I then went onto say that as this is a perpetual issue as commented / stated by the OP, it was beggars belief why anyone would not look to protect their own stock / property better as this kind of thing only causes a lot more trouble for both parties.

My comments were also born out through the normal logic we see in modern society, whereby we get into the 'Why should I' stance - thus I questioned this following the noted comments about the stock being on his land 7 times / 2 times etc, why one would not look to protect their own stock / property better, but I know damn well why this is not the chosen route, but that is another subjective discussion altogether, so I will not go there for obvious reasons!

Anyhow, leave your fences open, leave your livlihood protection to a legislative system that is about as much use chocolate fireguards apparently - but don't then moan about issues that arrise when - looking full circle, you can quite easily prevent them yourself.

Down in this part of the world boundaries against lanes/ roads etc etc mostly include a high bank and hedge on top the bank, you can have the best fencing ever invented on your field side of that road edged bank, but if stock are out roaming roads, it's just a case of them climbing the bank and skipping the top of the fence..... what do you suggest....fences up the sides of lanes?
(btw... the tarmac often touches the bottom of the hedge bank)

 

[JJT]

Erm, I have not said it is his responsibility so please do not twist what was said. I even started by saying I would be checking my own fencing to see how it happened, but hey - I believe I understand why you could be keen to ignore that part of the equation, but hey - here is the opening statement again for you!!



I have then, following additional one sided comments etc, basically questioned the logic of which in my mind is coming from seriously flawed logic in one relying on an old law, that is not able to be policed / enforced correctly - to a point that somehow makes someone who is hell bent on ignoring any legal requirement to fence their stock in, do so

Furthermore, I then went onto say that as this is a perpetual issue as commented / stated by the OP, it was beggars belief why anyone would not look to protect their own stock / property better as this kind of thing only causes a lot more trouble for both parties.

My comments were also born out through the normal logic we see in modern society, whereby we get into the 'Why should I' stance - thus I questioned this following the noted comments about the stock being on his land 7 times / 2 times etc, why one would not look to protect their own stock / property better, but I know damn well why this is not the chosen route, but that is another subjective discussion altogether, so I will not go there for obvious reasons!

Anyhow, leave your fences open, leave your livlihood protection to a legislative system that is about as much use chocolate fireguards apparently - but don't then moan about issues that arrise when - looking full circle, you can quite easily prevent them yourself.

Not the OPs fences though, are they! Think I might buy a farm next to you, get a load of stock and let you fence them in for me, hell of a deal

 

[Ukjay]

Down in this part of the world boundaries against lanes/ roads etc etc mostly include a high bank and hedge on top the bank, you can have the best fencing ever invented on your field side of that road edged bank, but if stock are out roaming roads, it's just a case of them climbing the bank and skipping the top of the fence..... what do you suggest....fences up the sides of lanes?
(btw... the tarmac often touches the bottom of the hedge bank)

Look Dave, with due respect as I respect your position, and obviously; it is 100% impossible to stop stock aimlessly getting onto ones property as everyone on here says so - no matter what a person can think of or question..

So to allow everyone to have their own way and abandon any potential circular perspectives, I will simply continue reading information in the background from the forward thinking posts on the forum - thereby ignoring all the areas one could be involved with which could open differences of views (pandoras box shall we say).

Thus leaving the ones whom stick themselves inside the proverbial box to continue to go onwards bitching and moaning, looking to apportion any and all the blame to everyone else, rather than stepping back and thinking: could I have done something differently to help prevent the situation in the first instance!!

Yes, I do look at things differently as I am not consumed by 'it's'always been done this way' mantra. Plus, I do not look to blame everyone else for things when the sh!t hits the fan.
I look within myself to see what I could do differently - as the first post I made highlights, but as is the norm - I become an outcast for daring to be thinking differently!